Apr 10 2026
4th Cir. 24-7141 Per Curiam

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDWARD MOORE, JR

The Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed Edward Moore, Jr.'s appeal from his § 2255 denial because he failed to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists could find the district court's assessment debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and found no constitutional error warranting further review, leaving the district court's denial of relief in place.

Apr 8 2026
10th Cir. 2:23-CR-00915-MIS-1) Panel Decision

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JESUS CORONADO

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to suppress evidence, holding that a lessee's general consent to search a unit for a suspect extended to the unit's roof. The court found officers lawfully seized a firearm from the roof under the plain-view doctrine because the search remained within the scope of that consent.

Apr 7 2026
11th Cir. 1:24-cv-00016-CG-B Per Curiam

JONATHON HOWARD BECK v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Jonathon Howard Beck's habeas motion, ruling that the record conclusively showed he received effective assistance of counsel. The court held that Beck's sworn statements during his plea colloquy created a formidable barrier to his claim that he did not understand his mandatory minimum sentences.

Apr 7 2026
5th Cir. 24-10436 Per Curiam

United States of America v. Acacedric Rashod Ware

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the denial of a § 2255 motion, holding that a defendant cannot prove ineffective assistance of counsel based on a conflict of interest without showing that the conflict adversely affected the defense strategy. Although the attorney's dual representation created an actual conflict, the record showed the lawyer withdrew immediately upon discovery and took no substantive actions that harmed the client.

Apr 6 2026
11th Cir. 5:24-cr-00060-MTT-CHW-1 Per Curiam

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. IKE JACKSON, JR

The Eleventh Circuit dismissed a defendant's direct appeal challenging his sentence for ineffective assistance of counsel because his plea agreement contained an enforceable waiver of that right. The court held that the waiver was entered into knowingly and voluntarily after the district court specifically questioned the defendant about it during the plea colloquy.

Apr 2 2026
11th Cir. 8:08-cr-00027-RAL-TGW-1 Per Curiam

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CHEDDIE LAMAR GRIFFIN

The Eleventh Circuit dismissed Cheddie Lamar Griffin's appeal from his § 2255 motion denial because his notice of appeal was filed after the statutory deadline. Although the prison mailbox rule applied, the filing date of March 10 missed the 60-day window that expired on March 4.

Apr 2 2026
10th Cir. 23-3175 Panel Decision

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EBUBE OTUONYE

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's partial denial of a habeas motion, holding that ineffective assistance of counsel regarding jury instructions on controlled substances did not prejudice a defendant's separate healthcare fraud convictions. The court reasoned that the fraud charges relied on distinct evidence and legal elements unrelated to the intent required for distributing controlled substances.

Mar 31 2026
9th Cir. 23-35483 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FRANCIS R. CASILDO

The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's dismissal of a federal prisoner's habeas motion, excusing procedural default due to ineffective assistance of counsel. The panel held that the defendant's prior Nevada conviction was not a qualifying controlled substance offense under the Sentencing Guidelines, necessitating resentencing without the career offender enhancement.

Mar 30 2026
4th Cir. 25-6295 Panel Decision

DANIEL NEIL JACKSON v. D. DAMERON, RN; DR. K. SMITH

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se prisoner's complaint, holding that district courts must construe pleadings liberally but are not required to act as legal advocates. The court determined the plaintiff's essential grievance was an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference, not an Americans with Disabilities Act claim.